Insights / News


Chaitanya Kediyal successful in High Court on wasted costs appeal

Chaitanya Kediyal successful in High Court on wasted costs appeal

Chaitanya Kediyal successfully acted for the Second and Third Respondents in the case of Rainer Hughes v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2024] EWHC 585 (KB).

This case covers wasted costs applications against legal representatives, and the perils of failing to translate witness statements and pleadings in civil litigation.

The High Court had the opportunity to provide guidance on the procedure to deal with, and the substance of, wasted costs applications made at the end of a substantive hearing. This was in the context of proceedings struck out due to a failure to translate witness statements and pleadings.

This judgment will be of significance to all practitioners dealing with clients who are not sufficiently fluent in English, as well as costs practitioners. The wasted costs order made against a law firm (and upheld on appeal) highlight the potential liability for failing to ensure compliance with CPR 22 (Statements of Truth) and CPR 33 (Evidence).

The wasted costs appeal was in the context of an RTA claim which was struck out when it proved impossible for the claimant’s witness statements and pleadings to be translated to Turkish by the start of the trial. Rainer Hughes was the claimant and part 20 defendants’ legal representative at that stage. The insurance company was the defendant and part 20 claimant in the underlying proceedings.

Following a wasted costs application hearing in the County Court at Central London, HHJ Monty KC ordered Rainer Hughes to pay the wasted costs of the insurance company. Rainer Hughes was also ordered to pay the insurance company and its former clients’ costs of attending the wasted costs application hearing. Rainer Hughes appealed to the High Court against the costs orders. Martin Spencer J dismissed all grounds of appeal.

In particular, the Judge was persuaded that the appeal against the Second and Third Respondents was “hopeless” (at §49). The Judge also highlighted the exercise a judge should procedurally undertake when dealing with a wasted costs application at the end of a substantive hearing (at §50). The Judge referred to an authority which had only been cited in the Second and Third Respondents’ skeleton argument.

To view the full judgment, click here.

Find out more

Chaitanya Kediyal completed a 12-month pupillage at a leading commercial set. He has worked on a wide range of commercial disputes, which includes DIFC litigation and international arbitration. Prior to commencing pupillage, Chaitanya taught the law of trusts at the London School of Economics as a Guest Teacher.

Chaitanya was offered tenancy after completing pupillage at Outer Temple Chambers. He will officially join Chambers as member from April 2024.

To find out more about Chaitanya, contact Sam Carter on +44 (0)203 989 6669 or Nicholas Levett on +44 (0)20 7427 4908.

News 27 Mar, 2024


Chaitanya Kediyal

Chaitanya Kediyal

Call: 2022

Portfolio Builder

Select the expertise that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download    Add to portfolio   
Title Type CV Email

Remove All


Click here to share this shortlist.
(It will expire after 30 days.)